Advertisement

Identification of Environment- and Context-Specific Key Factors Influencing the User’s Thermal Comfort

  • Antonios KaratzoglouEmail author
  • Yannick Meny
  • Michael Beigl
Conference paper
  • 664 Downloads
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 992)

Abstract

The indoor climate conditions in a working environment are extremely important, since these affect the employees’ mental state and may lead to a higher or lower productivity. For this reason, the focus in the last years rests on developing sophisticated and adaptable HVAC control systems. The respective systems attempt usually to regulate the users’ thermal comfort while keeping the energy consumption low. Recently launched products in this field deliver promising but still perfectible results with space for improvement. This could be attributed to the degree of awareness of current control approaches and the fact that they take only a limited number of environmental (e.g., temperature, humidity) and no context-specific factors (e.g., human activity and emotional state) into account. In this work, we explore whether and to what extend a number of environment- and context-specific factors influence the users’ sense of well-being. For this purpose, we deployed a server-based survey framework and conducted a 8-week long field study in an office environment. After performing a number of descriptive and inferential statistical analysis methods on the resulting data, it can be shown that there exist several factors, apart from temperature and humidity, that are capable of affecting significantly the users’ thermal comfort. The results presented in this paper could support the development of an improved, context- and emotion-aware generation of HVAC control systems.

Keywords

Smart buildings HVAC systems Thermal comfort Model Predictive Control (MPC) Context awareness Light intensity and temperature color Noise level Human activity Emotional state 

References

  1. 1.
    Klepeis, N.E., et al.: The national human activity pattern survey. A resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 3, 231–252 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roelofsen, P.: The impact of office environments on employee performance: the design of the workplace as a strategy for productivity enhancement. Health Facil. Manag. 1, 247–264 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clements-Croome, D., Baizhan, L.: Productivity and indoor environment. Proc. Healthy Build. 1, 630–633 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lan, L., Lian, Z., Pan, L., Ye, Q.: Neurobehavioral approach for evaluation of office workers’ productivity: the effects of room temperature. Build. Environ. 44, 1578–1588 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huizenga, C., Abbaszadeh, S., Zagreus, L., Arens, E.: Air quality and thermal comfort in office buildings: results of a large indoor environmental quality survey. Proc. Healthy Build. 3, 393–397 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leaman, A.: Dissatisfaction and office productivity. Facilities 13, 13–19 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seppänen, O., Fisk, W.J., Lei, Q.: Effect of temperature on task performance in office environment. Technical report, Helsinki University of Technology (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kamarulzaman, N., Saleh, A.A., Hashim, S.Z., Hashim, H., Abdul-Ghani, A.A.: An overview of the influence of physical office environments towards employees. Procedia Eng. 20, 262–268 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fang, L., Wyon, D.P., Clausen, G., Fanger, P.O.: Impact of indoor air temperature and humidity in an office on perceived air quality, SBS symptoms and performance. Indoor Air 14, 78–81 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jaakkola, J., Heinonen, O., Seppänen, O.: Sick building syndrome, sensation of dryness and thermal comfort in relation to room temperature in an office building: need for individual control of temperature. Environ. Int. 15, 163–168 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ichi Tanabe, S., Nishihara, N., Haneda, M.: Indoor temperature, productivity, and fatigue in office tasks. HVAC&R Res. 13, 623–633 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lan, L., Lian, Z., Pan, L.: The effects of air temperature on office workers’ well-being, workload and productivity-evaluated with subjective ratings. Appl. Ergon. 42, 29–36 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vimalanathan, K., Babu, T.R.: The effect of indoor office environment on the work performance, health and well-being of office workers. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 12, 113 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lan, L., Wargocki, P., Lian, Z.: Optimal thermal environment improves performance of office work. REHVA Eur. HVAC J. 2, 12–17 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amasuomo, T.T., Amasuomo, J.O.: Perceived thermal discomfort and stress behaviours affecting students’ learning in lecture theatres in the humid tropics. Buildings 6, 18 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steinmetz, J., Posten, A.C.: Physical temperature affects response behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 70, 294–300 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reinikainen, L.M., Aunela-Tapola, L., Jaakkola, J.J.K.: Humidification and perceived indoor air quality in the office environment. Occup. Environ. Med. 54, 322–327 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vischer, J.C.: The effects of the physical environment on job performance: towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress Health 23, 175–184 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Banbury, S., Berry, D.: Office noise and employee concentration: Identifying causes of disruption and potential improvements. Ergonomics 48, 25–37 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Smith, A.: Noise, performance efficiency and safety. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 62, 1–5 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Witterseh, T., Wyon, D.P., Clausen, G.: The effects of moderate heat stress and open-plan office noise distraction on SBS symptoms and on the performance of office work. Indoor Air 14, 30–40 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jahncke, H., Hygge, S., Halin, N., Green, A.M., Dimberg, K.: Open-plan office noise: cognitive performance and restoration. J. Environ. Psychol. 31, 373–382 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Veitch, J.A.: Office noise and illumination effects on reading comprehension. J. Environ. Psychol. 10, 209–217 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sundstrom, E., Town, J.P., Rice, R.W., Osborn, D.P., Brill, M.: Office noise, satisfaction, and performance. Environ. Behav. 26, 195–222 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roelofsen, P.: The impact of office environments on employee performance: the design of the workplace as a strategy for productivity enhancement. J. Facil. Manag. 1, 247–264 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Juslén, H.: Lighting and productivity in the industrial working place. Light. Eng. 14, 53–62 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jusléna, H., Wouters, M., Tenner, A.: The influence of controllable task-lighting on productivity: a field study in a factory. Appl. Ergon. 38, 39–44 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aries, M.B.C.: Human lighting demands: healthy lighting in an office environment. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Begemann, S., van den Beld, G., Tenner, A.: Daylight, artificial light and people in an office environment, overview of visual and biological responses. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 20, 231–239 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mills, P.R., Tomkins, S.C., Schlangen, L.J.: The effect of high correlated colour temperature office lighting on employee wellbeing and work performance. J. Circadian Rhythm. 5, 2 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hancock, P.A., Szalma, J.L.: Performance Under Stress. Ashgate Publishsing, Burlington (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ahmadpour, N.: Comfort experience in everyday life events. In: Chung, W., Shin, C. (eds.) Advances in Affective and Pleasurable Design, vol. 483, pp. 625–632. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41661-8_61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Auliciems, A.: Mood dependency on low intensity atmospheric variability. Int. J. Biometeorol. 22, 20–32 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Karatzoglou, A., Janssen, J., Srikanthan, V., Ding, Y., Beigl, M.: Comfort-efficiency-equilibrium: a proactive, at room level individualized climate control system for smart buildings (2017)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Karatzoglou, A., Jann, J., Srikanthan, V., Urbaczek, C., Beigl, M.: A predictive comfort- and energy-aware MPC-driven approach based on a dynamic PMV subjectification towards personalization in an indoor climate control scenario. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems - Volume 1: SMARTGREENS, INSTICC, pp. 89–100. SciTePress (2018)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shi, J., Yu, N., Yao, W.: Energy efficient building hvac control algorithm with real-time occupancy prediction. Energy Procedia 111, 267–276 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Veselỳ, M., Zeiler, W.: Personalized conditioning and its impact on thermal comfort and energy performance-a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 34, 401–408 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ellis, C., Hazas, M., Scott, J.: Matchstick: a room-to-room thermal model for predicting indoor temperature from wireless sensor data. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 31–42. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Oldewurtel, F., et al.: Use of model predictive control and weather forecasts for energy efficient building climate control. Energy Build. 45, 15–27 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Feldmeier, M., Paradiso, J.A.: Personalized HVAC control system. In: Internet of Things (IOT), 2010, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineering: ANSI ASHRAE standard 55-2010. Standard 55-2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Energie Burgenland AG: Energieeffiziente beleuchtung (2017)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kunkel, V.: RGB-farbmodell (2017)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Haynes, B.P.: An evaluation of the impact of the office environment on productivity. Facilities 26, 178–195 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Levine, J.A., Schleusner, S.J., Jensen, M.D.: Energy expenditure of nonexercise activity. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 72, 1451–1454 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonios Karatzoglou
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yannick Meny
    • 1
  • Michael Beigl
    • 1
  1. 1.Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Robert Bosch, Corporate Sector Research and Advance EngineeringStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations